GST Weekly Flashback for the period 9 to 15 February 2025.
Table of Contents
Delhi High Court
Dept. Failed To Restore GST Registration Despite Appellate Authority’s Order: Delhi High Court Directs Restoration
Case Title: Ms Prosperity Asset XII LLP Versus Superintendent Central Goods And Services Tax
The Delhi High Court while directing the restoration of GST registration held that the department has failed to restore Goods and Service Tax (GST) registration despite the appellate authority’s order.
The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar has observed that the mere decision taken by an authority to pursue the remedy of appeal does not result in the order-in-original or in appeal of which compliance is sought being placed in abeyance.
Kerala High Court
No More Biomedical Waste Management Crisis For Kerala: Kerala High Court Stays GST Registration Cancellation For IMAGE
Case Title: Image (Indian Medical Association Goes Eco-Friendly) Versus State Tax Officer
The Kerala High Court has stayed the GST Registration Cancellation for IMAGE (Indian Medical Association Goes Eco-Friendly), which is Kerala’s largest waste collection unit.
The bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas while granting the interim relief to IMAGE observed that for the continued recognition of the petitioner as an AoP under the Income Tax Act as well as by the Service Tax Authorities and GST Authorities for all these years, the grant of an interim order is essential. Since continuation of the GST registration cancellation order will cause irreparable injury and the balance of convenience is also in favour of the petitioner, it is only appropriate to stay the operation of the order under challenge.
GST Dept’s Illegal Cash Seizure & Handover to Income Tax Dept Under Section 132A Is Illegal : Kerala High Court
Case Title: Centre C Edtech Private Limited Versus The Intelligence Officer
The Kerala High court has held that the GST Department’s illegal cash seizure and handover to income tax department under section 132A of the Income Tax Act is also illegal.
The bench of Dr. Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Easwaran S. has observed that the initial seizure of cash from the premises of the appellant being illegal, the continued retention of it by the GST Department of the State, and the handing over of the cash to the Income Tax Department, cannot be seen as legal acts merely because the money was now handed over to the Income Tax Department pursuant to a requisition sent by them under Section 132A of the Income Tax Act.
Andhra Pradesh High Court
2 Days Delay In Issuing GST Notice Can’t Be Condoned: Andhra Pradesh High Court
Case Title: M/s. The Cotton Corporation of India Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Audit) (FAC)
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that 2 days delay in issuing GST notice cannot be condoned.
The bench of Justice R Raghunandan Rao and Justice Harinath N. has observed that the show cause Notice issued on 30th November 2024 for FY 2020-21 under section 73 is time barred and liable to be set aside.
GST Registration Can’t Be Denied To Person Of Another State: Andhra Pradesh High Court
Case Title: Tirumala Balaji Marbles And Granites Versus The Assistant Commissioner St and Others
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that the GST registration cannot be denied to person of another state.
The bench of Justice R Raghunandan Rao and Justice Harinath.N has observed that mere apprehension of tax evasion, however well founded, cannot deprive the petitioner of his right to carry on trade and business in the State of Andhra Pradesh.
Allahabad High Court
GST ITC Benefit Can’t Be Denied For Mere Non-Mentioning Of GSTN In Supplier Certificate: Allahabad High Court
Case Title: M/S Bhagwan Das Agrahari Versus State
The Allahabad High Court has held that the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) cannot be denied for mere non-mentioning of Goods and Service Tax Network (GSTN) in supplier certificates.
Jharkhand High Court
GST Dept. Can’t Deny Pre-Deposit Refund Citing Limitation: Jharkhand High Court
Case Title: M/s. BLA Infrastructure Private Limited Versus State of Jharkhand
The Jharkhand High Court has held that the GST department cannot deny pre-deposit refund citing limitation.
The bench of Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao and Justice Deepak Roshan has observed that when the Constitution of India restricts levy of any tax without authority of law, the retention of the same on the ground of statutory restriction, which is in conflict with the Limitation Act, appears to be being misread by the authorities of the GST Department.
